Science Turns Against Humanity
Misanthropic headlines suggest worrisome
trends justifying reduction in quality of life
In the following articles, ponder what is motivating scientists to ask the questions they choose to research.
What is the carbon footprint of a hospital bed? (University of Waterloo, 18 Sept 2023). The question in this headline says something about the worldview of the researchers who try to answer it. They want to put a guilt trip on patients seeking care and the doctors who treat them. Shouldn’t science celebrate modern medicine and its ability to give hope to those suffering? Instead, the researchers want to make them feel guilty that they are potentially hurting the climate. Whether the guilt is justified should be evaluated by history. See Roman Balmakov go through 32 headlines about climate predictions over the last half century that proved false.
Eating insects: the UK seems much more reluctant than the EU to let this industry flourish (The Conversation, 11 Sept 2023). Should insects be fed to farm animals and people? The concern of Pattanapong Tiwasing is less about making people free and happy with their food choices and more about helping “the environment” by reducing methane emissions from cattle and turning people toward alternative sources of protein other than beef and pork. Part of his rationalization is the alleged population explosion (see “The Population Bomb Bombed” here, 26 April 2019).
Who are the climate activists vandalizing art and museums, and why? (Phys.org, 18 Sept 2023). The media’s obsession with climate change has become a foundation for many a misanthropic headline. In this article, Stephanie Baum does not condemn the vandals who have thrown paint on priceless works or art in museums, glued themselves to the floor in public shows, or stopped traffic with their barricades, making drivers suffer for hours in summer heat. She is more concerned about ‘understanding’ the activists and determining whether their methods are effective or not.
Nudge theory: what 15 years of research tells us about its promises and politics (The Conversation, 6 Sept 2023). The essence of nudge theory is that people are stupid, so the government needs to push them in its preferred directions. It is elitist at its core (see “How to Nudge an Elitist,” 11 June 2017). In this article, Stuart Mills at Leeds University knows that nudges have been shown to be ineffective (see “Nudge Theory Falsified, 29 July 2022), but he thinks leaders can keep using them. Notice how he justifies this method of gentle coercion from the elites:
Nudges are also less controversial to the electorate than a new ban or mandate. A gentle push towards more environmentally friendly behaviour is likely to provoke less backlash among voters than a government ordering people to change the way they do things.
In this sense then, nudges remain useful political tools. They are cheap, and they neither ban nor mandate. And if they don’t work, it takes a while for voters to notice.
When you see that word “useful” by a scientist or politician, always remember to ask, “useful to whom?” Why is he not asking if liberty is useful to citizens?
Slums can provide lessons for building effective circular cities (Phys.org, 18 Sept 2023). Slums are good, these scientists seem to think: they illustrate how to grow a “circular economy” that turns outputs into inputs. People in slums “know how to make the most of what they have at hand,” as opposed to the rich and middle class who waste things and pollute. Instead of helping the poor out of their poverty and desperation, Matthew Abunyewah thinks they can be exploited to get more use out of trash and waste. Notably, his team’s “research” is being done at Charles Darwin University.
Flavoring each of these articles is the belief that people are bad for the planet. The “scientists” and “researchers” put themselves above their fellow citizens with the Yoda Complex. Instead of humbly wishing to contribute their expertise to helping others and improving their lives, they try to limit their freedoms and use coercion.
Misanthropy has been part and parcel of Darwinism, with its evil fruits of racism, eugenics, and genocide. Richard Weikart’s book Darwinian Racism (2022) contains eye-opening quotes from original German sources showing that the Third Reich strongly promoted Darwinism in public education as a rationale for its views on racial purity. Weikart answers objections from critics of this claim with references and quotations that make it indisputable.